Welcome to the best KC Chiefs site on the internet. You can view any post as a visitor, but you are required to register before you can post. Click the register link above, it only takes 30 seconds to start chatting with Chiefs fans from all over the world! Enjoy your stay!

Time to change our tune.

0

I honestly don't know how anybody can blame Huard or the play-calling for the horrible performance yesterday. We opened the game passing and stuck with it pretty much all the way because we had no run game. Passing the ball is the ONLY thing we did even remotely well, yesterday. Huard and mainly Solari have deservedly taken some heat and have both been the source of some well-placed doubts. Again though, they provided the only bright spot for us yesterday at all!

The problem was not only the absolutely disgusting lack of a run game but special teams as well. Far more impactful than the missed field-goal on the first drive, was Eddie Drummond's fear of catching a punt and running with it! We started every drive with horrible field position because he let every punt go and bounce down inside the 10-yard line. Drummond's timidness on punt-returns was unacceptable from a guy we brought in to do this job, specifically.

Another huge contributing factor in our loss yesterday, was Ty Law's inability to cover on third downs. It looked like Law was playing in Greg Robinson's "read and react" style defense when we used to see the Chiefs playing off the recievers so far on third-and-long that a conversion seemed almost inevitable every time. That was the worst coverage I have seen out of any Chiefs' defender this year.

Of course, a lot of the blame for yesterday rides squarely on the shoulders of Larry Johnson and the offensive line. 10 yards rushing at home? I want my money back!

The play-action pass is set up by the run. Not the other way around. If you can't get a run game going, the play-fakes will not sell and you will have blitzing defenders mauling your QB because the play-fake takes extra time in the back-field.

Croyle did get a TD yesterday in garbage time but he was throwing passes in the dirt and losing the ball out of his grip. Damon was over 15% better on completion percentage than Croyle yesterday with over three times the amount of attempts. Damon's average was almost two yards higher and his rating was twice as good as Croyle's-- Even with no TD's and a pick. Go ahead and keep telling me that Croyle needs to start and I'll keep calling whoever says it crazy.

The only way Croyle should get on the field at this point is if Huard is hurt and that's it.

Well 3 incompletes out of his final four passes hurt his percentage a lot, since it was in the red zone and he eventually did make the TD throw (realize it was crap time) give him some props. It was raining the entire time Broyle was in the game, Huard had the entire first half while it was dry, and the offense was on fire (thank god for that drive).

This is a new guy, when do you say use him? When Huard is hurt? Well Huard has been playing hurt all year long and it has shown.

Well 3 incompletes out of his final four passes hurt his percentage a lot, since it was in the red zone and he eventually did make the TD throw (realize it was crap time) give him some props. It was raining the entire time Broyle was in the game, Huard had the entire first half while it was dry, and the offense was on fire (thank god for that drive).

This is a new guy, when do you say use him? When Huard is hurt? Well Huard has been playing hurt all year long and it has shown.

Huard is decent, but I want a QB that is a star.

Hopefully it will be Broyle!

So, at 2-3 while still tied for first in our division, we pull the known-commodity that is Huard for a young, injury- and mistake-prone Croyle when we have no running threat to take any pressure off of either QB-- further increasing the risk of injury and potential mistakes to whoever is under center. Why get the "future star" hurt? Why unnecessarily hurt his confidence with bad performances? Why not ride Huard out for as long as possible since he does not have much longer to play, being the veteran "transition QB"? Why not give the Chiefs a chance to fix a few things to make it easier for Croyle when he does come in?

As far as being a "future star" goes, Croyle is a third round pick from Alabama who has suffered serious injury at every level of football he has played. Are defenses "nicer" or "softer" in the NFL than college? No.

IMO, unless Huard is injured Croyle should not be the starter in this situation, at this time.

So, at 2-3 while still tied for first in our division, we pull the known-commodity that is Huard for a young, injury- and mistake-prone Croyle when we have no running threat to take any pressure off of either QB-- further increasing the risk of injury and potential mistakes to whoever is under center. Why get the "future star" hurt? Why unnecessarily hurt his confidence with bad performances? Why not ride Huard out for as long as possible since he does not have much longer to play, being the veteran "transition QB"? Why not give the Chiefs a chance to fix a few things to make it easier for Croyle when he does come in?

As far as being a "future star" goes, Croyle is a third round pick from Alabama who has suffered serious injury at every level of football he has played. Are defenses "nicer" or "softer" in the NFL than college? No.

IMO, unless Huard is injured Croyle should not be the starter in this situation, at this time.

Ok, I'll bite.

If Broyle is not our future, then get someone else.

I am not in love with the kid.

We could have had any number of free agent starters this off season.

I'm just going with what we've got.

I have said repeatedly that I don't know if Broyle is the future, but I'm tired of waiting to see who is.

I do like his arm but his durability is suspect. He was hurt in high-school, he was hurt in college, and to put him in now is asking for more of the same. What the hell do you want out of the play-calling??? I don't get this. We run and it's bad play-calling. We pass and it's bad play-calling. Is there another way to move the football downfield that I don't know about? We still do a lot of motion and we did a lot of play-fakes yesterday. We are TRYING to confuse defenses but everything is getting sniffed out because we are one-dimensional. Everybody keyed on the run and now know how to stop the Chiefs from running. This gave us a small window of opportunity to get the pass going. With the complete lack of a running game and the pass being our only threat, it's only a matter of time before that stops working too-- much like what we saw yesterday.

audibles? maybe they have a video camera on our sideline and are reading our plays??? or then again, why would they need a video camera? they can just ask anyone in the stands what play we are going to run.

if you havent noticed from last year's playoff game till now, we ran on 1st and 2nd, passed on 3rd, then punted.

Yes, we are doing more passing now. But there were key times in the game yesturday, where we had 2 passes, 1 got us first down, second got us 2nd and 4...then we ran on 2nd and 3rd down for no gain and punted. I mean, right when our throwing game was on....we ran two times in a row and lost possession.

I disagree. If we call more play action passes (I know we started out that way yesterday) it will open up the run because we will have an accurate QB behind the line. NO team respects the Chiefs passing game right now. Huard was being saved by Dbowe and TG. His passes have been terrible for the past two weeks.

Herm gave up yesterday with 6 min to go he punted on 4th and 2 down by 3 scores. I realize we were backed up near our endzone, but if we are relying on our defense that much, then we need trust them to keep it within 3 scores and just let them have a field goal.

The Jags offense was eating up way too much of the clock with their offensive drives. Herm even said post game that he was calling the time outs so that we could see Broyle in the game and get him some time.

He never even thought of trying to comeback and win the game.

I know this isn't really what we were talking about, but maybe if we have a premiere QB in the game it will open up the entire offense.

I don't think that our offense is as bad as it looks.

We just need to come together and play as a team.

the game was already over. of course you punt it.

it was OVER. all the other coaches would have done the same given the score and time left and the situation at hand.

The play-action pass is set up by the run. Not the other way around. If you can't get a run game going, the play-fakes will not sell and you will have blitzing defenders mauling your QB because the play-fake takes extra time in the back-field.

Croyle did get a TD yesterday in garbage time but he was throwing passes in the dirt and losing the ball out of his grip. Damon was over 15% better on completion percentage than Croyle yesterday with over three times the amount of attempts. Damon's average was almost two yards higher and his rating was twice as good as Croyle's-- Even with no TD's and a pick. Go ahead and keep telling me that Croyle needs to start and I'll keep calling whoever says it crazy.

The only way Croyle should get on the field at this point is if Huard is hurt and that's it.

lol yeah he was losing the ball in his grip....did you notice it started pouring rain?

normally in the rain...the teams go to the run...but yeah....we are the chiefs, we dont have a running game. so we were forced to pass, which is not wise in the rain.

audibles? maybe they have a video camera on our sideline and are reading our plays??? or then again, why would they need a video camera? they can just ask anyone in the stands what play we are going to run.

if you havent noticed from last year's playoff game till now, we ran on 1st and 2nd, passed on 3rd, then punted.

Yes, we are doing more passing now. But there were key times in the game yesturday, where we had 2 passes, 1 got us first down, second got us 2nd and 4...then we ran on 2nd and 3rd down for no gain and punted. I mean, right when our throwing game was on....we ran two times in a row and lost possession.

We're chasing out tails on this play-calling thing. How can we be accused of running too much when we only ran the ball 10 times yesterday and put it in the air 41 times?? In theory, success with the pass will open up the run. I personally don't have a problem with them trying to work in the running game after they feel like they have stretched the defense some. I definately don't want to see us become so one-dimensional we pass on every play!

We're chasing out tails on this play-calling thing. How can we be accused of running too much when we only ran the ball 10 times yesterday and put it in the air 41 times?? In theory, success with the pass will open up the run. I personally don't have a problem with them trying to work in the running game after they feel like they have stretched the defense some. I definately don't want to see us become so one-dimensional we pass on every play!

For me the play calling is not all about we don't try and pass enough.

Yesterday we did, and it worked for awhile. Still didn't get the running game going.

When I referred to using play action pass to open up the game, I meant because it was working, and we could keep doing it until it didn't and then the deep routes would open up.

The play calling that I have a problem with is that they don't call the right plays at the right time.

I am not a NFL coach, but the ones that are need to be better at play calling.